Russia's entry into the capitalist path of development was accompanied by a change in the socio-economic situation in the country, the rise of social life and political struggle. The old classes-estates were replaced by classes of capitalist society, and the social structure of Russia became more and more distinct. Governing the country by the methods that had developed in the pre-reform period came into conflict with reality. In this connection, the autocracy was most urgently confronted with the question of the forms and methods of ideological influence on the working masses. A similar problem faced the bourgeoisie, which in the new conditions could not confine itself to the old ways of influencing the proletariat.

In 1914, V. I. Lenin gave a retrospective assessment of the policy of the autocracy and the bourgeoisie on the workers ' question:"In Russia, in accordance with its boundless backwardness, feudal methods of fighting the workers' movement are terribly prevalent. " 1 However, the predominance of feudal, in other words, patriarchal-guardianship methods did not exclude the use of other methods, including methods of ideological and political influence and corruption of workers. As early as 1899, V. I. Lenin proposed to formulate in the program of the Social-Democratic Party the tasks of the struggle "against all attempts of the autocratic government to corrupt and obscure the political consciousness of the people by means of official guardianship and false gifts" .2 Later, after 1905, he pointed out that "the most intelligent bourgeoisie clearly saw the unreliability of bare violence alone,"3 and that very great "progress" had already been made in terms of liberal and democratic methods of deceiving and corrupting the workers .4
Due to special political conditions, the "purely bourgeois" methods of political influence on the workers were not widely used in Russia, but the "progress in this area" that took place was undoubtedly directly related to the process of forming the proletariat into a class of capitalist society, the growth of its political consciousness, and the intensification of the revolutionary struggle.

The completion of the industrial revolution and the formation of the proletariat in the eighties of the nineteenth century, the rise of the working-class movement, which was characterized by mass strikes, and especially by the appearance at the Nikolskaya Manufactory in 1885, where workers first put forward class-wide demands, raised the question of the direction of the workers ' policy. Continuing to use repressive methods

1 V. I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 25, p. 322.

2 V. I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 4, p. 221.

3 V. I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 25, p. 144.

4 See ibid., p. 322.

page 81

measures taken against the workers (the Ministry of the Interior circular of 1870 on the expulsion of strikers, the "Regulations" of 1881 on enhanced and emergency protection, the Ministry of the Interior circular of 1897 on the expulsion of strikers instead of bringing them to trial), the government was forced to adopt factory laws. It saw in the workers ' strike in Orekhovo-Zuyev not an ordinary episode, but a threat to the state system, to the inviolability of the entire existing order. It was in the 1980s of the nineteenth century that laws came out one after another that regulated many of the most acute aspects of factory life at that time: in 1882, a law was issued restricting the employment of children, in 1885 - prohibiting manufacturers from putting women and teenagers on night shifts, in 1886 - concerning the conditions of employment of young people. hiring workers in factories and factories. These laws were forced concessions, and although they gave the manufacturers numerous opportunities to circumvent them, they generally somewhat limited the arbitrary and unrestrained exploitation of the workers.

The laws of the 80s (first of all, the law of 1886) had a number of paragraphs, the violation of which by workers was punishable by prison sentences and fines (violation of internal regulations, leaving work, participating in strikes). This was, so to speak, the repressive side of the legislation, aimed at developing workers ' obedience and submission to employers and the government. At the same time, the factory laws, both those mentioned above and subsequent ones (1897 - on working hours, 1903 - on factory elders, on liability of factory owners for injuries to workers, 1912 - on insurance, etc.), carried a certain political intent. They were intended to demonstrate the government's "guardianship" policy, and to reinforce in the minds of the working people the idea that the supreme power cares about them. In the conditions of relatively undeveloped class contradictions, the downtroddenness and darkness of the masses of the people, such a policy, especially at the initial stage, according to V. I. Lenin, enjoyed a certain success .5 He also pointed out (referring to the speech of the St. Petersburg workers in January 1905) that "certain elements of the working class still have a naive faith in the tsar."6 Even later, the monarchist ideas did not completely disappear among many workers, especially among the politically backward strata that joined the proletariat from the petty-bourgeois strata of the city and countryside. The autocracy's factory policy, including the Crippled Workers Act of 1903 and the insurance Laws of 1912, was based on these ideas.

According to the Government's plan, factory legislation should have been a dam on the way to spreading revolutionary ideas. As early as 1882, the State Council, when discussing the law on juvenile workers, was concerned that the workers "easily succumbed to the perception of revolutionary teachings." 7 This fear was more clearly expressed during the discussion of the bills of 1886 and 1897. The Government concentrated all its efforts on preserving "order and tranquility" in the country, seeking means to counter revolutionary organizations and the infiltration of socialist theories among the working class. The Government was particularly concerned about the emergence of social-democratic organizations. When presenting the 1903 bill on the responsibility of entrepreneurs for injuring workers to the State Council, Finance Minister S. Y. Witte considered it "the best bulwark against harmful doctrines." 8

5 See V. I. Lenin. PSS. T, 5, p. 74.

6 V. I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 9, pp. 176-177.

7 "Report on the State Council for 1882", St. Petersburg, 1884, p. 168.

8 " Report on office work of the State Council for the session of 1902-1903 Vol. II. SPB. 1904, p. 147.

page 82

At the end of January 1905, the Committee of Ministers began preparing draft laws on the working day, medical care, insurance of workers, mitigation of punitive articles for strikes, which were then discussed in the commission of V. N. Kokovtsev. At the same time, the main argument in favor of such measures was the thesis that the revolutionary movement can be weakened by timely regulation of the most acute social issues. "The consequence of the delay in the development of our factory legislation,"the official document said," was that the working - class movement, not being kept within the definite limits of a positive law, deviated from the economic path peculiar to it and fell under the influence of political agitation and police influence. " 9
The experience of the revolution, it would seem, should have shown the government the unsuitability of the patriarchal-guardianship policy in the workers ' question, but, however, in practice this did not happen. Tsardom again and again relies on the policy of guardianship, although it allows the workers to be independent to a certain extent (the law of March 4, 1906 on societies; insurance funds under the law of June 23, 1912). At the same time, the government counted primarily on the most backward masses of working people, who still retained monarchical illusions. Thus, by drafting insurance laws and submitting them to the State Duma for discussion, the Government sought to raise its shattered prestige. In 1913, the Council of Ministers, discussing the situation that had developed in the country in connection with the rise of the labor movement, designed a number of measures, including the organization of reconciliation chambers of mixed composition from workers and manufacturers, which were to include representatives from the authorities. Reconciliation chambers were supposed to take over the analysis of conflicts between workers and entrepreneurs. According to the Government, this "would have a positive side, in the sense of showing the Government's concern for the needs of the workers and teaching them to seek their just harassment not by strikes, but by appealing to the state authorities" 10 .

The policy of tsarism on the workers ' question corresponded to the general line of its internal policy. Repression as a means of keeping the masses in line under the conditions of developing capitalism and the aggravation of class contradictions became less and less reliable. Therefore, along with them, the autocracy is increasingly resorting to political influence on the working masses, mobilizing all the means at its disposal, the entire extensive indoctrination apparatus, and all the experience in governing the state, and for this purpose attracting certain layers of the intelligentsia of the autocratic-conservative trend. The school, the arts, the press, and the enlightenment were placed at the service of tsarism.

The school system (especially primary education, which was under the supervision of the Ministry of Public Education and the Synod) was supposed to educate loyal servants of the autocracy, devoted to the idea of "uniting the tsar with the people and the people with the tsar." Giving minimal knowledge, public schools, according to the instructions of the Ministry of Public Education, focused all their attention on religious and moral education. But there were not enough such educational institutions either. Many children of urban residents, artisans and workers remained outside the school. The people were robbed of education and knowledge, and this was elevated to the principle of an autocratic policy that hindered the development of the school network. Private initiative by progressives-

9 "The working question in the Commission of V. N. Kokovtsev", L. 1926, p. 22.

10 " Tsarism in the Struggle against the Working-class movement in the years of Upsurge." "Red Archive", 1936, N 1 (74), p. 63.

page 83

the progress in the field of public education was slowed down 11 . The literacy rate of the workers was very low. Their education was limited to elementary school knowledge, but even such elementary literate workers, including self-taught workers, accounted for only 50.3% in 1897, and 64% in 1918, 12 although industry, thanks to the growth of technology and its equipment with machines, required more and more literate and technically trained workers. According to the data of the late 80's, there were only 446 schools with 44.4 thousand students in factories and industrial enterprises, and in 1911-701 schools with 99.1 thousand students .13
The desire of the workers for knowledge and enlightenment increased as the political struggle in the country expanded and the people awakened. Advanced workers went to libraries and reading rooms, bought books and pamphlets, attended lectures and clubs.: "The Russian working class, unlike other classes and strata of Russian society, shows a constant interest in political knowledge." 14 The Social Democrats helped the workers to understand the political situation in the country, to understand the historical role of the proletariat in the destinies of mankind, and the experience of fighting the bourgeoisie for better working conditions, as well as the mass strikes of the 90's and early 900's, contributed to this. The revolution of 1905-1907 awakened broad strata of workers to political life and created an increased demand for literature and newspapers. According to V. I. Lenin, " millions of cheap publications on political subjects were read by the people, the masses, the crowd, and the "lower classes" as greedily as they had never read before in Russia. " 15
By closing Sunday schools in the early 1960s and banning popular readings on the grounds that they helped spread socialist ideas, the government is simultaneously trying to take over extracurricular education in order to use it as one of the channels for ideological influence on the people, for educating them in the direction desired by the autocracy. Most of all, the Government feared that the revolutionary worldview would permeate the people, that the enlightenment of the people would undermine the age-old foundations of the rule of law, shake the positions of the ruling classes, and push the State into the abyss of revolutionary upheavals.

The Government has constantly sought to put obstacles in the way of democratic publications and increase the output of" well-intentioned " literature. As early as 1850, Nicholas I approved the report presented to him, which proved the urgent need to distribute books among the people "aimed at establishing our commoners in good morals and in love for Orthodoxy, the sovereign and order"16 . These same thoughts found a place in the presentation of the Minister of National Education D. A. Tolstoy to Alexander II in 1866. Tolstoy proposed that, in addition to the censorship regulations of 1865 (according to which all books of small size were subject to preliminary censorship), a special supervision of literature published for "common people's reading"should be established. Such supervision was assigned to the Department established in 1869. A special department attached to the Academic Committee of the Ministry of National Education, so that it (as its chairman later wrote) does not allow those from the Ministry of National Education to apply.

11" The government can only tolerate, but will never sympathize with your cause, " Witte responded to the well-known book publisher I. D. Sytin's proposal to create a wide network of elementary schools and raise funds for this (I. D. Sytin. Zhizn dlya kniga [Life for Books], Moscow, 1962, p. 189).

12 A. G. Rashin. Formation of the working class of Russia, Moscow, 1958, pp. 593, 664.

13 "One-day census of primary schools of the Russian Empire, made on March 18, 1911". Issue XVI. Ptgr. 1915, p. 3.

14 V. I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 5, p. 11.

15 V. I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 22, p. 83.

16 B. V. Bank. Studying the reader from the people, Moscow, 1969, p. 14.

page 84

books that "aim or are likely to shake minds and cause confusion in religious, political, social and moral relations" 17 .

The Main Department for Press Affairs has repeatedly drawn the attention of local censors to the fact that they are very strict about publications for the people. Thus, in 1875, censors were instructed to "be extremely careful when censoring cheap publications intended for public reading, and, in case it is noticed... the malicious direction in them should not be limited to the exclusion of some sharp places, but to prohibit their entire printing." In 1874, in connection with the preparation of the publication of the works of M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin for the people, a new circular followed, which obliged censors "for the future to treat popular publications with special attention and rigor, not limited to applying general censorship rules to them"18 .

In 1897, the famous publisher F. F. Pavlenkov prepared the publication of the Illustrated Pushkin Library. A special Department of the Academic Committee of the Ministry of National Education allowed the inclusion of fairy tales, some novels ("The Young Peasant Lady", "The Captain's Daughter"), a number of poems and poems ("The Prisoner of the Caucasus", "Poltava", "Eugene Onegin") in the free libraries from the entire collection of works by A. S. Pushkin. As for other works ("Ruslan and Lyudmila", "The Robber Brothers", "The Tale of the Priest and his Employee Balda", "Dubrovsky", etc.), he stated that they cannot be allowed because of the incomprehensible content and many inconvenient places (for example, "Rusalka", " Peak the lady", "The Fountain of Bakhchisarai" contain many erotic passages, "The Robber Brothers" can confuse ordinary people, the fairy tale "About the priest..." will strengthen the not entirely favorable attitude of the people towards the clergy) 19 .

The government was particularly wary of the spread of a democratic press among the people, especially since the investigation conducted in 1867-1868. The Main Department for Press Affairs, showed that the retail sale of newspapers "which either do not correspond in their direction to the views of the government, or try to attract readers through various kinds of annoying disturbing rumors", is carried out not only among the intelligentsia, but also among the "common people". The Committee of Ministers in 1868 ordered the Ministry of the Interior to indicate to local authorities periodicals and pamphlets that should not be allowed for retail sale. 20
Since about the 70s of the 19th century, the government and church organizations have created a whole network of institutions whose activities were covered up with specious signs of "fighting drunkenness" and spreading knowledge among the people, but in essence, they were used for an ideological attack on the working people, for corrupting and stupefying them with the ideas of"Orthodoxy, autocracy and nationality". At the same time, the Government restricts the activities of liberal - bourgeois cultural and educational organizations by various circulars and resolutions, puts obstacles in the way of the distribution of democratic literature, subordinates free libraries, reading rooms, evening schools, lectures and readings to supervision.

In 1872 she started working at the Ministry of National Education

17 A. I. Georgievsky. To the History of the Scientific Committee of the Ministry of National Education, St. Petersburg, 1902, pp. 142, 144.

18 "Archive Fund of the Main Department for Press Affairs". "Literary Heritage, vol. 22-24, p. 625.

19 "Pushkin's works and tsarist censorship". "Red Archive", 1937, N 1 (80), pp. 230-237.

20 See B. V. Bank. Op. ed., p. 16.

page 85

the permanent commission on the organization of people's readings, which immediately launched a rather stormy activity. The sphere of its influence, formally limited initially to the capital, and since the 90s to the St. Petersburg School District, in fact, extended to the whole country. The Commission was granted the right to publish pamphlets for reading, which were used not only by the commission itself, but also were a mandatory guide in the activities of all cultural and educational societies and organizations. The circulation of published pamphlets at that time was very significant. Total from 1872 to 1897 it published 215 pamphlet titles, and from 1906 to 1912, 115 pamphlets with a total circulation of 4.2 million copies .21 By their subject matter, these pamphlets were aimed at glorifying the autocracy and the church. Some works of great Russian writers were reprinted, mainly fairy tales, and stories were given selectively, and often in a revised form.

The government encouraged the publication of" folk "literature, did not prevent the publication of popular publications, which were sometimes based on the unceremonious treatment of the works of great Russian writers (for example, N. V. Gogol's story" Taras Bulba "in such publishers turned into" The Robber Taras Chernomor "or" The Adventures of the Cossack ataman Urvan", etc.). One of the most prolific writers who enjoyed government subsidies was the elder of St. Isaac's Cathedral, E. V. Bogdanovich, the author of numerous pamphlets of autocratic and patriotic content. Among the publishers for naroda was a certain Kardo-Sysoev, who flooded the market with brochures in the 80s: "Everyone should understand Eremey about yourself", "Don't open your mouth for someone else's loaf", "Life for the tsar or captivity from the Turks", "The tsar freed, the peasant did not forget" , etc., etc.

The advanced workers angrily opposed such literature and the policy of stupefying the people. P. Alekseev, in his famous speech at the court in 1877, said bitterly:: "Do we have useful and accessible books for the employee? Where and what can they learn? ...Nothing can be more striking than the fact that such books as "Bova Korolevich", "Yeruslan Lazarevich", "Vanka Kain", "The Groom in Ink and the Bride in Soup"are published for public reading... I think that everyone knows that in Russia the workers are not yet free from persecution for reading books, and especially if they see a book that speaks about their situation - then hold on. " 22 Despite all the obstacles, the workers got acquainted with advanced literature. Addressing G. I. Uspensky, they wrote in their address:: "You like to tell the simple truth... from these good books we were able to benefit for ourselves; we learned to think about our lives and about our comrades, and about the lives of different people, we learned to distinguish good from evil, truth from falsehood." 23 The workers responded to the death of M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin. They wrote: "In his person, Russia has lost the best, just and energetic defender of truth and freedom, a fighter against evil." 24
In the 80s, under the leadership of churchmen, "temperance societies" began to arise. At the same time, they did not oppose the cultural backwardness of the people and the difficult living conditions that were the reasons for the spread of drunkenness, but conducted religious and monarchical propaganda, published relevant posters, popular magazines (for example-

21 " An outline of the activities of the Standing Committee of People's Readings established by the highest order for the first twenty-fifth anniversary of its existence. April 6, 1872-1897". St. Petersburg, 1897, p. 36; "A brief sketch of the activities of the Permanent Commission of People's Readings from 1906 to 1912". St. Petersburg, 1912, p. 7.

22 "The Working-class Movement in Russia in the XIX century", vol. II, part 2, Moscow, 1950, p. 45.

23 Ibid., vol. III, part 1. Moscow, 1952, p. 562.

24 Ibid., p. 676.

page 86

mer, "Rest and Christ", "Sunday Gospel"), held readings, opened dining rooms and tea rooms. Among such "societies", the largest scale was the activity of the St. Petersburg Alexander Nevsky Society, which had 10 branches, including in factories. In 1881, in St. Petersburg, with the participation of the highest clergy, the "Society for the Dissemination of Religious and Moral Education in the Spirit of the Orthodox Church" was created, which became the supreme headquarters for all existing "temperance societies"in the country. Later, the Ministry of Finance was also involved in this kind of activity.

The introduction of the wine monopoly in the mid-90s was accompanied by the organization of national sobriety guardianships in each province, which gradually turned into quite powerful institutions with significant material resources, a wide network of people's homes, libraries, and tea houses.

The St. Petersburg commission for the organization of people's readings, "sobriety societies" and guardianship did not accidentally choose working-class districts and industrial enterprises directly as their place of activity. With their propaganda, they hoped to distract the workers ' attention from everyday life with its acute social conflicts. So, the St. Petersburg commission, having started holding readings in the hall of the City Duma, then, with the support of entrepreneurs, moved them to the Thornton factory, the Obukhov and Putilovsky factories, the Russian-American and Nikolaev manufactories. The Society for the Propagation of Religious and Moral Enlightenment, along with talks in churches, also held readings in many factories, factories, and railway workshops. If Zubatov's policy of dividing the workers and leading them to the path of economic struggle failed in Moscow, then the Commission for Organizing General Education Readings for Factory Workers, established in 1902, which had the equally reactionary goal of instilling monarchism, lasted until 1914. It was founded by the Moscow Governor-General Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich, Chief of Police D. F. Trepov and the highest local clergy. The leaders of Zubatov organizations M. Afanasyev, F. Slepov and N. Krasavsky also took an active part in this enterprise.

The activities of all these governmental and semi-governmental organizations were constantly criticized by the democratic strata of the population. It was so odious that it could only develop successfully with the support of the government apparatus, under the protection of prohibitive circulars and regulations. But even in this case, it was possible to count on success only among the most obscure and backward strata of the population.

In an effort to limit the spread of progressive literature, the government in 1867 subordinated city and free libraries (the main contingent of visitors to which were working and democratic strata of the population) to the Main Press Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, so that the latter would monitor their activities and prevent "unreliable" persons from working in these institutions. In 1884, the Ministry was given the right to indicate books and pamphlets that should not be allowed in libraries, and in the same year such a list was compiled. In 1887, the catalogues of gymnasium libraries were reviewed and cleared of anything that the ministry considered inappropriate, and then in 1888 it was the turn of free libraries, which were run by city councils and the liberal bourgeoisie. Of particular concern to the Government was the increased number of visits to such libraries by "commoners", i.e. artisans, artisans and workers. In order to prevent the penetration of "dangerous" literature into their environment, a Special Department of the Scientific Committee proposed to separate "commoners" from the general mass of readers,

page 87

by creating libraries for them with a special selection of books 25 . In 1890, libraries were ordered to have time-based publications strictly within a certain list. In addition to special publications on agriculture, medicine, and technology, it included only reactionary government and church newspapers and magazines (Blagovest, Russian Pilgrim, Vestnik Sobriety, Sunday, Citizen, Novoe Vremya, Niva, and Moskovskie Vedomosti, "Moskovsky listok", "Tsar-kolokol")26 . In the same year, a new circular further restricted the activities of free libraries. They had to be completed from books listed by the Ministry of National Education and the Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church . Circulars of the 90s of the XIX century were caused by the desire to close access for workers to literature on socio-political issues and classical fiction, to use libraries as hotbeds of monarchism and church influence.

Having taken upon itself to hold people's readings in the capital, the government was forced to agree to the organization of cultural and educational societies with the inclusion of points on the organization of readings in their charters. Initially, readings were allowed only in provincial towns (1876), and since 1894 throughout the country. By allowing popular readings, the government put their organization under its control. Readings were to be conducted only on pamphlets approved by the Ministry of Public Education and the Synod, and only "trustworthy" persons (representatives of the clergy, teachers of schools) could be invited as lecturers.

These regulations subordinated to government interests the activities of all cultural and educational organizations, the emergence of which falls on the post-reform period. Following the literacy committees of St. Petersburg and Kharkov, formed in the 60s, similar committees appeared in Kiev and Nizhny Novgorod, and soon commissions began to appear for organizing folk readings, spreading literacy, useful books, and folk entertainment. According to incomplete estimates, the total number of various types of cultural and educational societies at the beginning of the XX century reached 247,288 . They existed in all provincial and many uyezd cities. Democratic and liberal-bourgeois strata took part in the creation and work of cultural and educational societies.

After the 1890 circular on free libraries, the purge that followed dramatically changed the contents of their catalogues for the worse. The catalog compiled by the Ministry of National Education (1897), which is mandatory for all libraries of this type, included books and essays on church and moral and religious topics, a small section on Russian and world history (popular pamphlets on military exploits of soldiers and generals, biographies of grand dukes and tsars, history of monasteries, books by N. M. Karamzin M. P. Pogodin and D. I. Ilovaisky), Department of Natural Science Subjects. The most extensive department was literature. It consisted of a large number of fairy tales by Russian and foreign authors, works by a number of Russian and Western European writers. At the same time, the works of N. A. Nekrasov, A. S. Pushkin, L. N. Tolstoy and many others were given selectively. The catalog did not include works by G. I. Uspensky, M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin, N. G. Pomyalovsky, and N. N. Zlatovratsky. Free libraries,

25 A. I. Georgievsky. Op. ed., pp. 150-151.

26 A. S. Prugavin. Laws and reference information on primary education, St. Petersburg, 1898, p. 550.

27 A. S. Prugavin. Requests of the people and Duties of the Intelligentsia, St. Petersburg, 1895, pp. 536-537.

28 "Yearbook of Public education". Issue I. M. 1907, pp. 279-287.

page 88

created by the liberal bourgeoisie, they bought a large number of books on natural science subjects and fiction, but this did not radically change the situation.

The catalog of pamphlets and works intended for popular readings was of the same character, if not worse. The 1897 catalog contained only 141 titles, including 38 books of spiritual and religious content, 46 on history and geography, and 24 on literature. The last section turned out to be the most miserable: it included only one fairy tale by V. A. Zhukovsky ("Ivan Tsarevich and the Gray Wolf"), one story by N. V. Gogol ("Taras Bulba"), two works by A. S. Pushkin ("Poltava "and"The Captain's Daughter"). At the same time," Taras Bulba "and" Captain's Daughter "were given in abridgment, and" Poltava " - in a retelling. But the list was filled with handicrafts of minor authors (V. Zhelikhovskaya - "Gordey Lesovik", "Our Orthodox Warriors", "Sidorych Bezymyanny"; A. Snetkova - "Happiness is not in money", "Old Man Nikita and his Three daughters" - a reworking of Shakespeare's tragedy "King Lear", etc.). Later, when these restrictions became meaningless due to the appearance of publishing houses that began to produce works of Russian classical literature in large editions and at an affordable price, catalogues began to be replenished, but the principle of their compilation remained the same: works of a democratic nature and books with freedom-loving motives were still not allowed. Nevertheless, some works of M. Y. Lermontov ("The Song about the Merchant Kalashnikov", "Boyar Orsha"), N. A. Nekrasov ("Frost Red Nose", "General Toptygin"), I. S. Turgenev ("Mumu", some stories from the series "Notes of a Hunter" - "Notes of a Hunter") appeared in the catalogues. Bezhin Meadow", "Singers"), V. G. Korolenko ("The River Plays"), L. N. Tolstoy ("How much Land does a person need", "Where love is, there is God", "God sees the truth, but will not soon tell", "Three deaths").

The readings were held in many cities and attracted a large number of visitors. The nature of the readings held by cultural and educational societies largely depended on their organizers. In some cases, cultural and educational societies blindly followed the official catalogues, in others they deviated from them, paying great attention to readings on natural science and literary and artistic topics. Hence, naturally, there was a different attitude to the readings, and the contingent of their visitors was not the same. Readings on religious, moral and purely ecclesiastical subjects attracted more adults, mainly women; readings on natural science and literary topics attracted democratic strata of the population, especially young people. There were much more visitors to the latter type of reading.

The activities of the national sobriety boards of trustees were of a special nature. At the first stage, they organized libraries-reading rooms, evening schools; later, due to a sharp decrease in the number of visitors to these institutions due to the openly ecclesiastical and monarchical program of their activities, the guardianship authorities began to pay more and more attention to the so-called "reasonable entertainment". A significant place in the work of the trustees was occupied by the creation of tea rooms and canteens, where the visitor could receive not only a "couple of teas" or lunch, but also find himself in an environment that should affect his psychology and worldview. For this purpose, in addition to specially selected libraries, tea rooms and canteens were supplied with newspapers and magazines such as "Vestnik Sobriety" or "Rural Bulletin", posters (twelve holidays, portrait of the tsar, heroes of the Russian army), games (checkers, skittles), etc. something like the prosveshcheniya clubs.

The chief prosecutor of the Synod, K. P. Pobedonostsev, who was afraid of any manifestation of free-thinking, was sharply opposed to the cultural-pro-Russian revolution.-

page 89

charitable societies and folk theaters. In 1896, he wrote to the head of the main Department for Press Affairs, E. M. Feoktistov: "They started a folk theater and are happy. There is something to do! If this theater, like all the others, is left without supervision, it will only serve as a new tool for corrupting the people."29 . In 1900. Witte, going to meet Pobedonostsev, who was opposed to guardianship, sent the latter a circular regarding the program of organizing "entertainment". It stated that entertainment should not instill habits of sophisticated theatrical "spectacles" and thus wean people "from more monotonous and modest ways of spending their time" .30 The choice of plays, it was said later, requires great care, and one should strive for their "ennobling" effect on the people. After that, the guardianship authorities became more and more interested in conducting festivities with dances and booths; on the stages of folk houses, low-art, entertaining plays were staged, designed for undemanding tastes ("Soldier Yashka-red Shirt"," Crow in Peacock feathers"," Groom with trombone"), divertissements with the participation of buffoons, clowns. "It seems to me, "wrote the author of one letter to Pravda, referring to St. Petersburg," that the entire setting and repertoire of the people's house not only does not distract and ennoble its visitors, but rather vulgarizes and corrupts them."31
The revolution of 1905-1907 marked even more sharply the polarization in the alignment of class forces in the country and brought greater certainty to the political struggle. The Government could no longer fully maintain the system of control and supervision it had created over the activities of cultural and educational organizations. At the end of 1905. it refused to impose a specific catalog on free libraries, allowing them to have all publications that are censored for circulation in the country .32 Libraries of cultural and educational organizations now had Russian and foreign art classics, political literature in their collections, and the selection of newspapers and magazines became wider (to a lesser extent, this was reflected in the libraries of city councils). However, social-democratic literature and the press still, with rare exceptions, did not get access to libraries, and from this point of view they did not meet the demands of the workers. The development of the library network was strictly limited, as the opening of new libraries (especially those of trade unions and workers ' cultural and educational societies), as before, required permission from the authorities.

At the end of 1907, a turnout procedure for holding people's readings was established. By allowing such readings, the Government stipulated that the subject matter of the readings should not be "contrary to the law and not endanger public peace and security." 33 Later, a circular issued by the Ministry of the Interior on January 28, 1908, restricted the operation of the 1907 law, making the conduct of readings dependent on their subject matter and the personality of the lecturers. This circular was directed against the political aspect in the work of cultural and educational societies, whose activities have acquired a large scale in these years.

Adapting to the changed environment and taking into account that their previous activities were far from effective and did not attract the most developed workers and democratic strata of the population, the Government decided to-

29 "Letters of K. P. Pobedonostsev to E. M. Feoktistov". "Literary heritage", vol. 22-24, p. 560.

30 "Collection of circulars, orders and explanations on the establishment of guardianships on national sobriety", St. Petersburg, 1900, pp. 57, 60.

31 Pravda, No. 20 (224), 25. I. 1913.

32 E. N. Medynsky. Extracurricular education, its significance, organization and technology. Moscow, 1918, p. 197.

33 " Legislative acts of the transition period (1904-1908)". SPB 1909, pp. 145-147,506.

page 90

government agencies and public trusteeships are to some extent reorganizing their work. Thus, while the St. Petersburg Commission continued to publish religious and moral pamphlets on tsars and generals, it also published a number of pamphlets that responded to political events in the country and were intended to be distributed among the workers: "Conversation about the State Duma", " Conversation about the inviolability of the individual, about freedom of conscience, speech, assembly and unions (regarding the manifesto of October 17)", " About strikes. How they are treated in different countries", "Eight-hour labor in Russian factories and factories". An eight-hour working day is necessary, wrote the author of the latest pamphlet, I. I. Yanzhul, but it is impossible to introduce it immediately, as the St. Petersburg and Moscow Soviets of Workers ' Deputies tried to do. A reduction in the working day will occur only when the productivity of workers increases. Another pamphlet said that the manifesto of October 17 brought "the long-desired freedom", that the Duma would have been called earlier, but this was prevented by the "revolutionaries" who killed Alexander II, that the Russian workers should take an example from the American and Western European ones and settle disputes with entrepreneurs peacefully, without interfering with the government, which allowed unions and unions to be formed. it is going to introduce conciliatory institutions to sort out misunderstandings between workers and entrepreneurs. The work of the commission was approved by the Chairman of the Council of Ministers, Witte, who proposed at the beginning of 1906 to put the task of spreading information about the phenomena taking place in the political life of the country among the people on a more definite basis, recommending for this purpose to create a special publishing commission and provide it with funds. But even before that, the Minister of Internal Affairs A. G. Bulygin, recognizing that "the press is a great force" and that the struggle against revolutionary propaganda by police measures does not achieve its goal, suggested to Nicholas II in March and then in April 1905 to organize the publication of the newspaper " protective direction "and publish leaflets for distribution among the people. 34
Social democracy and socialism were most strongly opposed by the Moscow Commission of General Education Readings, which defended monarchism as a principle of organizing state power, and church ideology as a system of worldview. Recognizing that the workers had a thirst for knowledge and an interest in socio-political teachings, the commission tried to take over the leadership of the cultural and political needs of the proletariat, to direct them in the Orthodox-national direction in the spirit of loyalty to the supreme power. 35 The Commission conducted readings in the Historical Museum, factories and factories in Moscow, where along with natural science subjects, literature (for example, "Religious elements in the work of I. S. Turgenev") and history, prepared accordingly, church and moral subjects ("About God", "About the Meaning of Life", "About the meaning of life") occupied a large place.On the origin of the world and man", on the teachings of Leo Tolstoy). At the same time, artistic means were used, for example, Vasnetsov's painting "The Last Judgment", the organization of choirs. The lectures were conducted by the Rector of Moscow State University A. A. Tikhomirov. The readings attacked the ideas of socialism and the revolutionary movement, and Darwinism was interpreted as a false teaching incompatible with Christianity. The following pamphlets issued by the commission should also serve this purpose: "To the Rich and Poor "(Metropolitan Vladimir), "On Labor and Property" (aka), "The Christian Church and Socialism" (Aivazov), "The Citizen and the Proletarian" (L. Tikhomirov), " The Merits and Mistakes of Socialism "(his work).

34 "Tsarism in the Struggle against the Revolutionary Press in 1905". Red Archive, 1941, No. 2 (105), pp. 144-148, 150.

35 " Decade of general education readings for factory workers in Moscow. 1902-1912". Moscow, 1912, p. 1.

page 91

same). All these pamphlets, written in a calm and reasonable tone, with copious quotations from excerpts from the works of P. Lafargue, K. Marx, F. Engels, and the Erfurt Program, were directed against socialism, proletarian solidarity, the labor movement, and strikes .36
Contrasting socialism as a materialistic and, in their opinion, "egoistic" theory with Christianity as a religious and social worldview based on spiritual and ethical principles, the churchmen did not stop at condemning wealth and the desire for profit, calling on the owners and workers to be guided by the principles of Christian faith and justice and to look at their work as moral debt. Then, they argued, there would be the peace, equality, and universal prosperity that the gospel calls for. The priest Petrov, whom Lenin called "a Christian democrat and a very popular demagogue," 37 in his sermons, speeches to workers, and in his pamphlet "The Gospel as the Basis of Life," argued that a different kind of life is possible on earth from the one that people lead - a life without untruth, selfishness, and rude actions. forces. Science seeks in vain to rebuild life, it has become bankrupt. The key to future prosperity is the sacred feelings of brotherhood, love for one's neighbor, and striving for moral perfection inherent in man .38 Before the revolution of 1905 and 1907, the commission had been careful not to raise pressing questions of a political nature before the workers, but now they began to occupy an increasing place in the program of its activities. Not only the topics of credit, cooperation, and the national economy, but also such subjects as the State Duma and its significance, the Constitution, and labor and agricultural legislation, have become increasingly common. At the same time, it was argued that the development of society takes place "organically", that the supreme power is sensitive to all changes and meets the aspirations of the people, that strikes should not become a weapon of the workers, but a peaceful discussion of their needs through association in professional organizations.

The revolution of 1905-1907 revealed the positions of all classes and parties, dispelled the illusions that "all the people equally strive for freedom and want the same freedom" 39, put an end to the "muddle-headedness" that existed among the common people, a mixture of elements of patriarchy and elements of democracy 40 . "The bourgeoisie," wrote Lenin, " cannot directly influence the workers in modern Russia. The fifth year has made the workers mock the bourgeoisie and its liberalism"41 . At the same time, he warned that the bourgeoisie, accustomed to relying in its struggle against the workers on the power of power, on repression, on Black-Hundred pogroms, would "perhaps tomorrow think of some more subtle forms"to disunite the workers .42 Using the Duma elections as an example, V. I. Lenin analyzed the Cadets 'calculations on the possibility of leading the petty bourgeoisie and the petty-bourgeois part of the proletariat, and came to the conclusion:" The Cadets are beginning to apply the 'English' method of struggle in Russia

36 These pamphlets differed in tone and argumentation from the writings of E. V. Bogdanovich ("A sincere word to the Russian workers"), V. Serdyuk ("A word to the Russian working people about troublemakers") and others, rude and arrogant, who cursed the" earphones "and"troublemakers".

37 V. I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 15, p. 16.

38 A. S. Shapovalov wrote in his memoirs that in 1888, when he was about 17-18 years old, he fell into the net of religion. Under the new paper mill there was a" temperance society " created by Priest Slepyan, and under the slaughterhouse - by Priest G. Petrov. The latter tried to introduce elements of Tolstoy's teaching into the dead dogma of Orthodoxy (A. S. Shapovalov. In the Struggle for Socialism, Moscow, 1934, p. 41).

39 V. I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 19, p. 420.

40 See V. I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 22, p. 85.

41 V. I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 23, p. 309.

42 V. I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 12, p. 147.

page 92

the struggle between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, not by violence, but by bribery, flattery ,disunion, cajoling the "moderates", making them ministers, deputies, electors, etc. " 43 Comparing the situation in Poland and in Russia, and pointing out that in Poland the bourgeoisie, resorting to methods of political influence, found a certain support among the masses, V. I. Lenin wrote: "There will also be times in our country when all sorts of bourgeois natives will bring nationalism, some kind of Christian democracy, and anti-Semitism to the working masses"44 .

The Russian bourgeoisie has not reached the point of using either "English" or" French "or" German " methods and methods of dividing and subordinating the workers to their interests. But the liberal bourgeoisie would not be such a bourgeoisie if it did not resort to attempts at ideological penetration into other classes, if it did not show a desire to take the leadership of the political movement of the people into its own hands. V. I. Lenin attributed to such attempts the desire of the liberal bourgeoisie to reduce the working-class movement by all means to a purely professional one, which was clearly revealed on the eve of 1905 and especially during the years of the revolution. "At the heart of all this gigantic (in terms of breadth of impact on the masses) The bourgeois substitution is based on the tendency to reduce the working - class movement mainly to a professional movement, to keep it away from independent (i.e., revolutionary and directed towards a democratic dictatorship) politics," wrote V. I. Lenin45 .

Unable to exert direct political and organizational influence on the workers, the liberal bourgeoisie, under the guise of promoting the enlightenment of the workers, made extensive use of the cultural and educational societies it created, the number of which began to increase after the revolution, and actively distributed newspapers and political literature among the workers. From the end of 1905 to October 1907, the cadets published more than 66 leaflets and pamphlets with a circulation of 2.4 million copies. In addition to the newspapers published in the center, they had many provincial organs in their hands , 46 with the help of which the bourgeoisie tried to introduce its ideology and worldview to the masses. It used every opportunity to create its own cadres from among the workers, to sow doubts in them, to lead them away from the path of revolution. The liberal bourgeoisie, as V. I. Lenin pointed out, tries in a thousand ways to influence the workers by lectures, speeches, and books, instill opportunism in them, instill the ideas of trade unionism, and plant constitutional illusions. "Constitutional illusions are political-opportunist and bourgeois poison, which is now pouring millions of copies of the cadet press into the people's brains." 47
After 1905, when the sharp struggles subsided, the liberal bourgeoisie strenuously began to introduce the ideas of nationalism, the division of workers on national and religious grounds. Cultural and educational societies included quite significant groups of workers. The number of visitors to the Ligovsky People's House in St. Petersburg, which was a major center of liberal-bourgeois propaganda and had evening schools, a library, a theater, clubs in drawing, literature, and natural science subjects, increased from 123.5 thousand to 334.2 thousand between 1903 and 191348 . Moscow People's University, which started

43 V. I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 14, p. 265. During the elections to the Second Duma in St. Petersburg, as a result of the withdrawal of the Mensheviks, the previously unified social - democratic organization split, after which the Cadets declared that negotiations on the distribution of seats were possible with the" moderate " socialists (Mensheviks).

44 V. I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 14, p. 343.

45 V. I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 11, p. 111.

46 E. D. Chermensky. Bourgeoisie and Tsarism in the First Russian Revolution, Moscow, 1970, p. 164.

47 V. I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 12, p. 347.

48 E. N. Medynsky. Op. ed., p. 38.

page 93

In the first year of its activity, it attracted 11.6 thousand people, and in 1911-1912 - already 45.1 thousand people. 49 Such universities, in addition to Moscow, existed in St. Petersburg, Voronezh, Kazan, Nizhny Novgorod, Rostov-on-Don, Samara, Kiev, Saratov, Tver, Tiflis, Baku, and a number of cities in Poland. Not all of them were as active as Moscow and St. Petersburg, but they were characterized by the desire to attract workers to their lectures and courses as much as possible. To do this, they settled in enterprises and working-class areas, as was the case in Moscow, St. Petersburg, and Kazan, and came into contact with professional organizations, as did St. Petersburg, Kazan, and Voronezh National Universities.

The program of activities of cultural and educational societies changed significantly after 1905-1907. The topics of lectures on medicine, geography, physics, mathematics, astronomy, literature, which were of great educational and practical importance for the audience, were expanded. There were more lectures on socio-political and contemporary subjects. This trend has also had a noticeable impact on the activities of reading commissions. Its events were attended by more and more workers and the so-called middle strata of the city. So, for example, in Kharkiv, the commission managed to hold 151 readings in 1905, which were attended by up to 23.8 thousand people, in 1911 there were 141 readings with 30 thousand 50 visitors . The Kiev Commission held 228 readings in the decade from 1882 to 1892, and only in 1912 - 1826, the number of visitors increased from 57.1 thousand to 308.1 thousand people .51
People's universities, people's houses, and reading commissions covered their specific political goals with concern for educating the people and spreading knowledge, and declared themselves "non-partisan." The Bureau of the Moscow People's University, which had among its members cadets D. N. Golovin, A. A. Manuilov, P. I. Novgorodtsev, and G. B. Iolloss, saw its task as "serving the working class, in the broad sense of the word, the stratum of the population", and the courses and lectures given were by no means party-oriented. 52 N. V. Dmitriev, chairman of the St. Petersburg Society of People's Universities, stressed that the task of the society is "to develop public consciousness, find out the correctness of the worldview, expand horizons and promote the formation of socially developed groups", immediately stated that people's universities are "alien to all politics", but, however, " non-partisanship should not be indifferentism " 53 . The same position was adopted by the Congress of People's University societies in 1908: "Societies that aim at democratizing the enlightenment, as non-party institutions, should pursue exclusively educational goals." 54 The Lithuanian People's House, when publishing a report on the results of the first decade of its activity, also declared that the lecturers "adhered, as far as possible, to complete non-partisanship and strict scientific coverage of the issue being treated." 55 In 1910 in St. Petersburg

49 "Report on the activities of the Moscow Society of People's Universities in 1906-1907", Moscow, 1907, p. 26; " Report... in 1911-1912, Moscow, 1914, p. 13.

50 "Report on the activities of the Kharkiv Commission for organizing People's Readings for 1911", Kharkiv, 1912, pp. 68, 82-83.

51 A. S. Prugavin. Requests of the people and duties of the intelligentsia, p. 122; E. N. Medynsky. Op. ed., p. 220.

52 "Report on the activities of the Moscow Society of People's Universities in 1906-1907", p. 5.

53 N. V. Dmitriev. Problems of National Universities, St. Petersburg, 1906, p. 7.

54 "Proceedings of the First All-Russian Congress of People's University Societies and other educational institutions of Private Initiative, St. Petersburg, January 3-7, 1908", St. Petersburg, 1908, p. 29.

55 " Report of the Lithuanian People's House for the first decade. 1903-1913". SPB. 1914, p. 22.

page 94

The first issue of the Bulletin of People's Universities was published, in which an editorial article declared: "The Bulletin will be devoid of any partisanship, any biased, tendentious angles of view." 56 This insistent emphasis on "non-partisanship" and disinterest in "angles of view" was not accidental: the liberal bourgeoisie had something to cover up and hide from the people.

Cultural and educational societies paid much attention to the organization of courses on the history of literature, the history of Russia, especially on issues of state and law. They were read by qualified specialists of the liberal-bourgeois direction. Before the First World War, a certain place in the courses of lectures was occupied by topics that directly meet the interests of workers (insurance, labor and recreation, wages, housing). In 1914, Moscow University, which played a leading role in the system of liberal-bourgeois cultural and educational organizations, published a program of lectures synthesizing the experience of all national universities. It consisted of sections on natural sciences (physics, chemistry, astronomy, geography), on Russian and universal history, the history of public thought, Russian literature, and the state ("Historical Types of the state", "People's Representations in individual states", "Society and the State"). Explaining the idea of such a program, its authors wrote: "The individual and society in their mutual relations are the main issue that runs through all the proposed topics" 57 .

The liberal bourgeoisie did not confine itself to giving lectures and organizing technical courses. It used such means of influencing workers as the theater, libraries, festivities, excursions, exhibitions, legal advice, and created tea and canteens. All these events were significantly different from similar events of government agencies. Thus, the Ligovsky People's House attracted professional artists to direct the theater (P. P. Gaideburov), the repertoire mostly consisted of the best plays by Russian and foreign authors - A. N. Ostrovsky, A. S. Pushkin ("Boris Godunov"), N. V. Gogol ("The Inspector General", "Marriage"), Moliere ("The Miser"), Beaumarchais ("The Marriage of Figaro"), A. M. Gorky ("At the Bottom", "Philistines"), L. N. Tolstoy ("The Power of Darkness", "The Living Corpse"), etc. Readings, talks, festivities, performances, and the organization of choirs took place at many enterprises, including those located outside large cities: at textile factories in the Vladimir and Moscow provinces, at coal mines and metallurgical plants in the Donbass, at enterprises in the Urals, and in the oil fields of Baku. At the Ivota glass factory there was a people's house, where in winter performances were staged, lectures were held, in summer there were festivities, games (football, small towns)were organized58 . In St. Petersburg, since 1885, there was a "Nevsky Society for arranging folk Entertainment" (Shlisselburgskoe Highway), which had a garden, a summer and winter stage, and also organized festivities with dances, various kinds of divertissements, and staged performances. In addition, there was a Vasileostrovsky Theater for workers in St. Petersburg, and a special lecture hall at the Nobel Mechanical Plant.

V. I. Lenin and the Bolsheviks fought against the cadet liberal-bourgeois influence on the workers, exposed its counter-revolutionary character, the theories of "classlessness" and "non-partisanship", and opposed the Mensheviks and liquidators as agents of bourgeois tendencies in the Republic of Armenia-

56 "Bulletin of National Universities", 1910, N 1, p. 5.

57 "Program of readings in the classrooms of the Moscow National University", Moscow, 1914, p. 3.

58 "Report on the people's House of the Ivotsky factory of the Maltsevsky Factories Joint-stock Company for 1913". Bryansk. 1914, pp. 3-5, 7.

page 95

they taught the workers to recognize the interests of certain classes behind any moral, political, or social phrases or promises .59 "The influence of the intelligentsia, which is not directly involved in exploitation, is trained to operate with general words and concepts, runs around with all sorts of" good" precepts, and sometimes, out of sincere stupidity, elevates its inter - class position to the principle of an extra - class party and extra-class politics-the influence of this bourgeois intelligentsia is dangerous, " wrote V. I. Lenin. And he warned: "Here, and only here, is the infection of the broad masses evident, capable of bringing real harm, requiring the exertion of all the forces of socialism to combat this poison." 60
The Bolshevik Party did not take an outside position in relation to government and liberal cultural and educational societies and similar organizations. In the words of V. I. Lenin, it called for work to be carried out " to use absolutely all and every "legal opportunity", starting from the rostrum of the black Duma and ending with any sobriety society."61 . But this was permissible only if work in such organizations did not lead to dissolution in the liberal - bourgeois environment, as was the case among the Mensheviks after 1905, if it was carried out with the knowledge of the party and in the spirit of its decisions. The Party considered it necessary to combine legal and illegal methods of work, to use the smallest legal opportunities to strengthen ties with the masses, and to spread Marxist ideas.

Neither the Government nor the liberal bourgeoisie has succeeded in achieving the set goals of diverting any significant masses of workers from the revolution. The sharpness of the social contradictions in the country and the uncompromising exposure of government and liberal-bourgeois policies by the Bolsheviks did not allow the workers to be corrupted and diverted from the revolutionary solution of class problems. Familiarization with the aspects of the activities of the government and the liberal bourgeoisie that are considered in the article allows, on the one hand, to reveal more fully the methods of their policy, the means to which they resorted, and, on the other, to reveal the difficulties that stood in the way of the working class to the socialist revolution, which the Bolshevik party had to overcome in the struggle for.

59 See V. I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 23, p. 47.

60 V. I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 16, p. 40.

61 V. I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 22, p. 255.

page 96

Permanent link to this publication: